[etni] Fwd: Grammar again
- From: <Leo.Selivan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 09:29:52 -0000
Hi Jenifer
If you're not tired of my comments yet I'd like to address your question again
(!)
Historically English language teaching has often lurched from itemistic
rule-by-rule learning to extreme communicative approaches with no grammar focus
at all. So the answer to your question is certainly somewhere in between - a
good healthy balance.
Personally I am not anti grammar, not at all. If anything I've actually argued
for more grammar input (see for example, my article on the TeachingEnglish
website:
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/grammar-vs-lexis-or-grammar-through-lexis
<http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/grammar-vs-lexis-or-grammar-through-lexis>
). But when I say more grammar I don't mean more discrete item by item
learning which often has little to do how language is used or what Scott
Thornbury refers to as serving your students a diet of "Grammar McNnuggets"
(see his blog post here:
http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/g-is-for-grammar-mcnuggets/
<http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/g-is-for-grammar-mcnuggets/> )
The activity you describe - I am not sure if it's dictogloss or live listening
but labels are not important - perfectly captures what grammar learning should
entail. You start with content which is essential lexical and then slowly lead
your learner to grammaticalise throught text reconstruction tasks, task
repertition or what Larsen-Freeman described as "grammaring".
Encountering grammar in context is certainly not enough. But grammar
exploration in class should start with examples of how grammar is used in
context and then abstracted to patterns, generalisations and rules, if
applicable.
LEO
________________________________
From: ETNI list <etni.list@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:22:05 +0200
Subject: [etni] Fwd: Grammar again
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jenifer Byk <byk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Grammar again
I originally posted a grammar comment concerning a pupil who didn't
realize that the grammar she was learning - adding ..ing or ..s or
..ed, and differentiating between the tenses had anything to do with
the English language as used. In fact, over the years, many of my
students have asked me if English speakers use all the tenses. (The
simple answer is'yes'), This really had nothing to do with whether
Brits and Yanks follow the rules of prescriptive grammar or not.
However, I doubt if any native speakers, whatever their level of
education, will use present simple rather than present progressive, or
most of the other tenses.
However, the question I would like to ask the list is this. Do we
give formal grammar too much weight? On the other hand, does 'grammar
in context' always give the pupil enough practice with the forms. But
on the other hand again, do the endless grammar exercises have any
carry-over into writing. I don't believe they do. So I waver between
thinking that grammar exercises, for all their faults, are necessary,
and between thinking "What for?
When I taught in the system, I always kept the 'grammar' marks
separate. We are all familiar with those students who always get 100%
on a pure grammar test, but don't have enough vocabulary to bless
themselves with. Then there are those who write and read perfectly
acceptable English and have large vocabularies, but make every mistake
possible in formal grammar tests. If the disparity was too large in
the latter case, I scrapped the grammar marks.
So how does one teach students to write? Well, if you want them to
learn to write, they must write. Giving them a subject to write about
elicits only "I don't have anything to say about..." What I do is read
them a very short story or anecdote, and tell them to write down
everything they remember. They always have questions. How do you
say...., which I answer, and that way they gradually learn how to say
what they want to say.
So what do other teachers have to say about grammar and how they teach
it, and whether it is good for anything?
Jennifer
------------------------------
The British Council is the United Kingdom's international organisation for
educational opportunities and cultural relations. We are a registered charity;
209131 (England and Wales) SC037733 (Scotland). We create international
opportunities for the people of the UK and other countries and build trust
between them worldwide. We call this cultural relations.
This message is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it. The
British Council accepts no liability for loss or damage caused by software
viruses and you are advised to carry out a virus check on any attachments
contained in this message.
Other related posts:
